This guide is maintained as a current resource for September 2026 and covers only the laws of England and Wales. Information is for general guidance, not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.
Explore when redundancy can lead to an unfair dismissal claim in England and Wales. This guide explains genuine redundancy, flawed processes, unfair selection, sham redundancy, automatic unfair grounds and how to assess and pursue a tribunal claim with practical steps.
Redundancy is a recognised fair reason for dismissal under UK employment law, occurring when an employer's need for employees to carry out particular work diminishes or ceases. However, a redundancy dismissal can still lead to an unfair dismissal claim in certain circumstances. Employees who believe their dismissal was not genuinely due to redundancy, or that the employer mishandled the redundancy process, may have grounds to bring a claim to an employment tribunal. This article explains when redundancy can lead to an unfair dismissal claim in England and Wales, the legal tests involved, practical scenarios, time limits, and steps you might consider if you think your redundancy was unfair.
What Redundancy Means in Law
Under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA), redundancy occurs when an employee is dismissed wholly or mainly because:
- The employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on a business or particular type of work.
- The need for employees to carry out work of a particular kind has diminished or ceased.
- The place of work has closed or the need for employees at that location has diminished.
In these situations, redundancy is treated as a potentially fair reason for dismissal. However, whether the dismissal is fair overall depends on how the employer conducts the redundancy process.
Ordinary Unfair Dismissal Claims in Redundancy Situations
Even where a dismissal is genuinely for redundancy, the employment tribunal will examine whether the employer acted reasonably in all the circumstances. This is the same test applied in other unfair dismissal cases: whether the employer's decision and process fell within the range of reasonable responses of a reasonable employer. An employee with sufficient service (typically two years' continuous employment) can claim ordinary unfair dismissal if the redundancy process was flawed. Key procedural issues include:
- Genuine consultation - Employers must consult with employees about the risk of redundancy, the reasons for it, and alternatives. Failure to consult meaningfully may make a dismissal unfair. The Employment Appeal Tribunal has emphasised the importance of meaningful consultation before dismissals are finalised.
- Fair selection criteria - Where multiple employees are at risk, employers must apply objective, non‑discriminatory selection criteria. A poorly justified or unfair selection process can lead to an unfair dismissal claim.
- Consideration of alternative roles - Employers should consider offering suitable alternative employment within the organisation where such roles exist. Failure to do so can make a dismissal unfair.
Citizens Advice lists these and other procedural failures as potential bases for challenging redundancy decisions as unfair. Employees may need to show that their employer failed to follow a fair process or did not genuinely need to make redundancies.
“Sham” Redundancy and Unfair Dismissal
A redundancy dismissal may be challenged as unfair if the employer's stated reason is a pretext for dismissal. For example:
- The employer claims redundancy but continues to recruit at the same level for the same type of work.
- The business could have offered alternative roles but did not genuinely consider these.
- The redundancy situation is contrived to dismiss a particular employee for reasons unrelated to genuine business needs.
In such cases, the claimant might argue that the true reason for dismissal was not redundancy at all, and that the employer's explanation is a “sham”. If successful, the tribunal may find the dismissal unfair because the employer has failed to show a fair reason for dismissing the claimant.
Unfair Selection for Redundancy
Even where there is a genuine need for redundancies, an employee can challenge their selection for redundancy if it was unfairly conducted. Selection criteria must be objective, transparent, and applied consistently. Examples of potentially unfair selection include:
- Shortlisting individuals on improper grounds, such as protected characteristics or personal bias.
- Applying inconsistent scoring systems without justification.
- Excluding employees without reasonable basis while retaining others in similar roles.
An unfair selection does not automatically make the redundancy itself void, but it can support an unfair dismissal claim where the employer has not acted reasonably. Tribunals will review whether selection criteria were appropriate and applied fairly across the workforce.
Situations Where Redundancy Can Be Automatically Unfair
In limited circumstances, redundancy selection can be automatically unfair - meaning the employee can claim unfair dismissal regardless of length of service. These occur where the principal reason for dismissal is a prohibited ground such as:
- Asserting statutory employment rights (for example, asking for minimum wage or flexible working).
- Engaging in health and safety actions.
- Making a protected disclosure (whistleblowing).
- Being selected for redundancy linked to pregnancy, maternity or shared parental leave.
- Trade union membership or activities.
If an employee can show that the redundancy selection was for one of these prohibited reasons, the dismissal will be automatically unfair, and there is no qualifying service requirement to bring a claim.
Time Limits for Making a Claim
An employment tribunal claim for unfair dismissal must generally be presented within three months minus one day from the effective date of termination of employment. This time limit is strict, and employees should start Early Conciliation with Acas before submitting a claim. Failure to comply with the deadline and pre‑claim procedures can result in the claim being rejected.
Practical Steps if You Believe Your Redundancy Was Unfair
- Gather documentation - Keep copies of letters, emails, and notes from redundancy meetings and consultations.
- Check the fairness of the process - Review whether your employer genuinely consulted, used objective criteria, and considered alternatives to redundancy.
- Assess the reason for selection - Look for inconsistencies or indications that selection was influenced by prohibited reasons.
- Consider professional advice - Advisory services such as Acas or Citizens Advice can provide guidance, and a solicitor or union representative can assist with claims.
- Act promptly - Begin Early Conciliation with Acas as soon as possible within the timeline to preserve your right to bring a tribunal claim.
Key Takeaways
Redundancy itself is a potentially fair reason for dismissal under UK employment law, but it can lead to an unfair dismissal claim if the employer fails to handle the process reasonably, bases selection on inappropriate criteria, invents a sham redundancy, or dismisses an employee for automatically unfair reasons. Employees with sufficient length of service may claim ordinary unfair dismissal where procedural or substantive flaws exist. In specific circumstances where prohibited reasons drive redundancy decisions, dismissal may be automatically unfair regardless of service length. Understanding these principles and acting promptly is essential for employees seeking to challenge redundancy through an employment tribunal.
